I'm going to repeat what Naznatips has said in these topics before. DKII may have also said it - BengaBenga, as well.

Old reviews are good for building up a back library of critical data which allows publishers to look at the way we review games and see whether or not working with us is worthwhile. Old reviews help us get new games to review, which is necessary because right now? We're operating almost solely on reviewing out of our own collections. We get review copies, but it's not very many, and we still need to put out reviews. Therefore, we review old games.

There are other reasons, too, but I'm going to bet you won't find them nearly as convincing as that one.

 I'm just wondering; is there any rule regarding who is able to write a review? Can anyone write a review on any website with no danger of getting sued or anything?

I'd imagine the answer is yes, but I'm wondering as the same isn't the case in Norway (someone reviewed a book in a newspaper, then was sued for it being unrealistic and incorrect).

A review must substantiate their view with evidence to prove what they are saying. They can be sued if the opinion is unfairly warranted, it does happen.

You do learn something at university.

There's already a great review by a genius, but it has been unfairly treated

So basically you guys are reviewing old games in hopes of getting new review copy's. The base of that hope is called VGchartz and that website is often criticized for it's lack of sales data. I personally do see that gathering intel is difficult, but the general view on VG simply isn't that positive and even as the only site that try's to get their numbers straight, this site is only mentioned a handful of times as a source on other articles.

I still don't see the point in reviewing age old games, and I'd still like to empathize to put more focus on the core of this site. That's where you will get your reliability from and ultimately free review copy's. Not from reviewing Killzone 1 when 2 just got released. Metacritic will place your reviews as your visitor numbers grow anyway, and for growing numbers you need...

To summarize: Focus on the core business to be deemed as a trustworthy site. Not on have been reviews.

P.s, this is of course not meant as a bash on reviewers. Just to be clear on that.

Gazz, tell me something. I'm not involved in the numbers process in any way. I work for free. I do not take up any resources used by the numbers people. How am I taking away from the core of the site?

i argee with u, i will never read a review off of vg, yet there are several reviewers now. vg should have more people that gather the sales data. "do what your good at"

So there are just 2 people here focusing on the numbers and the rest are busy with irrelevant "hobby's" that may, or more likely may not help the site?

Every activity on this site that is not a core activity is a distraction. One of those hobbyists could of course have written a small article on the effects of Killzone 2 on renewed killzone 1 attention and an uplift of it's sales, but no. They wrote a completely unnecessary review which had been put front page making the site look like it's not been updated since 2005.

Gazz is right. Unless it's about sales data it shouldn't be here. We should shut down the forums immediately since they aren't dedicated to collecting sales data. Everyone who posts in forums should instead be at video game stores watching what people buy and writing it down for the site!